Transvaal and Free State go on the offensive

I agree, but perception in Europe was that, in reality, Britain was the "aggressor" - my point was that in this timeline, with out and out Boer aggression, maybe the sympathy for them as David vs the British Goliath is less in evidence.

I was just being a nitpicker.

The Boers technically started the war, but blame for it can be laid at the feet of the British (who had been looking for an excuse to take over the Transvaal for years).
 
IOTL London did enough to keep the colonial governments largely on side, enough that they were willing to quickly mobilise forces to send. So regardless of what foreign public opinion thinks, they've managed that.
 
I also think that the amount of gold (and diamonds) would make it impossible for Britain to leave it alone.

However, if Durban is occupied it will take some planning to get anywhere.

I am not sure how well developed Port Elizabeth was at that time in terms of massive traffic.

East London is not really an alternative in 1899

The Boer organisation was a bit of a mystery. If professional instructors (Germany?) had come to the assistance, the Boer armies might have had more success.

Ivan
 
German Advisors

Here is a link to a brief bio on Albrecht
http://www.victorianweb.org/history/boerwar/35.html
As for foreign volunteers
2000 - Dutch
1550 German
1350 Scandinavian
300 USA
250 Italians
250 French ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boer_foreign_volunteers

"In September 1899, Schiel held meetings in Johannesburg and Pretoria and, shortly afterwards, the German Commando was established in Johannesburg. A branch, which was called the German Corps, was formed in Pretoria."
http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol022ng.html
Working this into this scenario will be interesting. Perhaps have Germany more aggressive in the expansion of Namibia and annexed Bechuanaland before the Brits did.

If the Boer Gov had been more enthusiastic and supported foreign legions there could be a much larger pool of volunteers. You would have to have more visible support though from European govs during Krugers visit.
"President Kruger travelled to Europe in 1900 seeking military help for his farmers. No nation offered him any assistance and the German Kaiser refused to even meet with him."

As always with WIF you have to back track somewhat to find an effective POD to create the alternate timeline, lots of fun!
 
I wonder how difficult it'd actually be for the Boers to hold Durban. I mean, they've got no naval vessels; any mines will be home-made, and likely crude; coast defense guns will be limited to repurposed field pieces.

When half a dozen British protected cruisers roll in and attempt to take the port back by coup de main is there really that much the Boers can do about it?

Edit: The Boers' best move would be to take the city, wreck the port then leave ASAP, rather than attempt to hold the city.
 
Last edited:
I looked up a few numbers:

All from Pakenham's 'The Boer War'.

2/3's of all inhabitants in Cape Colony were Afrikaners
90% of all in Natal were British (or rather English-speaking)

Although impressive, the reality is a bit more complex:

1) Most farmers in outlying areas were Afrikaners. City dwellers could be a bit of everything, but mostly English-speaking.

2) Although Schreiber was PM in Cape, the Cape Afrikaners loyalty was not necessarily towards Transvaal

3) The influx of the uitlanders from Transvaal must have added another 20-30,000 to the English speaking numbers

4) English-speaking does not necessarily mean 'loyal to the crown'. Loyal to their own back-pocket might be more descriptive.

5) Natal was very much loyal to the crown insofar as a lot of the inhabitants were born in the 'empire' or one generation down.

PS: I got de Wet in on the raid on Natal rather than Botha. Sorry.

If we pursue this a bit, we might see a situation where the remote areas of Cape colony can swing towards the republics, leaving Cape Town only in the hands of the British invasion force.

This becomes a nightmare scenario as the army corps would still have to travel across this 'empty' space to get to Free State.

Turning to October again, Botha and his merry men might have got to Durban.

... as said, not many options in Durban, wrecking the docking facilities might be a better option, but that is counter-productive. It will not gain many supporters.

Occupy Durban with less than 2,000 boers is not an option either.

Natal: A tactical victory and a strategic defeat?

Cape: A tactical stalemate and a strategic victory?

Ivan
 

Czar Kaizer

Banned
Cape Afrikaners would not necessarily support the Boers, in fact a fairly large percentage were loyal to the crown, what reason do they have to support the republics? Don't forget Afrikaner nationalism was something which only emerged well after the union was formed after 1910, in fact it was the aftermath of the Boer war and the memory of the concentration camps that gave birth to Afrikaans nationalism. Before then the Cape Afrikaaners had as much reason to support the Republics as an Englishmen, which was nothing.
Also the Republics taking control of the Cape is ASB. The Cape is as considered to be as British as Canada, Australia and New Zealand, they will do everything in their power to hang on to it. The Cape is also mostly made up of non white coloureds and the british had no problem arming them to fight off the Boer commando raids near the end of the war. If they feel that they might lose the Cape they would just arm non whites who are not only loyal to the crown but also have no love for the Boers who are seen as more racist than the British.
 
Correct. But it is a bit more complex.

I got some numbers from Pakenham's 'The Boer War'.

2/3 of all inhabitants in Cape Colony were Afrikaaners.
90% of all in Natal were English-speaking.

The 'complexity' is that the rural Cape were by and large all Afrikaaners. Their loyalty might have been closer to the Republics.

The urban dwellers - Cape Town by and large, were more 'cosmopolitan' and more 'loyal' to the crown. Afrikaans or not.

The English-speaking part in Cape were not necessarily fully behind everything what the Empire did. Rhodes is an example. Despite all his bluster and imperialism, it had to be on his terms.

Schreiner was PM of Cape Colony, but also kept the Cape neutral.

All of this also made sure that Smut's raid later was not successful.

Natal was again different. A majority were either born in the UK (Empire) or at least first generation in Natal. Their loyalty was much more assured.

It gets interesting insofar as if Botha had stormed down to Durban in October, the military opposition might have been light, but there would be no real popular backing.

Storming into Cape colony could be fun, but it is empty at that part. There is a long way from the border to Cape Town.

Even with support from the few farmers, the real support would have to be found around Cape Town. And that might be hard to come by.

Possible? Milner was not so sure.

The uitlanders who had fled from Transvaal must also have pushed the general loyalty towards the British.

Could the Cape have been compared to a Canada? There I shall be needing some guidance. I simply don't know or will hazard a guess.

The English-speaking part of that part of the world was (and still is) not a homogeneous group.

Buller wanted to arm the non-whites, but that was too much for Schreiner. He would rather lose the Cape than arm non-whites.

If we extrapolate all of this a bit, let us imagine:

Botha invades Natal in October and gets to Durban.
Cape is invaded but there are no clear occupation lines. Kimberley and Mafikeng are occupied and parts of the railway line to de Aar are held.

Cape Town is secure and there is no general insurrection, although a lot of the rural Boers are signing up with the republics.

Now what?

No doubt that Britain will try to get it all back.

The question is: How? and how long will it take?

Ivan
 
A question: what's the possibility of the British going more easy on immigration for either the Indians or the Chinese to counterbalance the Boers after the experience of a more brutal war?
 
That is a very good question: I know that a lot of the Chinese got 'employed' in the mining industry.

I think the main interest (of Milner at least) was to have a far higher rate coming from the Empire. In essence: good British citizens - protestant and white.

There was a fair bit of Americans emigrating to SA as well, as far as I know, but I don't have any numbers for that.

Anybody on that?

Ivan
 
Top